MANILA, Philippines?In an article that appeared Wednesday on BBC News, security analyst Charles Shoebridge listed the 10 things that he said the Manila police got wrong in the Aug. 23 hostage crisis.

The 11-hour crisis ended with the hostage-taker, dismissed Senior Insp. Rolando Mendoza, killed in the police assault, and at least eight of the 25 hostages dead.

The tragedy could have been avoided, according to Shoebridge, who has worked in counterterrorism with the British Army and Scotland Yard.

He cited the 10 areas in which the police could have done better:

Determination

The police who stormed the bus ?showed great courage to go on board? but were driven out by gunshots from Mendoza.

?Squads like this have to be made up of very special people, especially trained and selected for their characteristics of courage, determination and aggression,? Shoebridge said.

However, he said, the police ?acted as 99 percent of the population would have,? and didn?t seem to have the necessary determination and aggression to face the attacker.

Lack of equipment

The police suffered from lack of equipment, taking a long time to smash windows when they could have used frame charges to instantly knock in windows and the door.

?They almost looked like a group of vandals,? Shoebridge said.

He also noted that the police carried inappropriate firearms. He said the ideal firearm to carry was a short submachine gun, suitable for use in confined spaces.

Disarming the gunman

?The negotiators were so close to [Mendoza], and he had his weapon hanging down by his side. He could have been disabled without having to kill him,? Shoebridge said.

Failure to shoot gunman

There were occasions when Mendoza was standing alone and could have been shot by a sniper.

?You are dealing with an unpredictable and irrational individual. The rule should be that if in the course of negotiations an opportunity arises to end the situation decisively, it should be taken,? Shoebridge said.

Satisfying his demands

Authorities could have just given in immediately to all of Mendoza?s demands.

?A promise extracted under force is not a promise that you are required to honor. Nobody wants to give in to the demands of terrorists, but in a situation like this, which did not involve a terrorist group, or release of prisoners, they could have just accepted his demands. He could be reinstated in the police, and then be immediately put in prison for life for hostage-taking,? Shoebridge said.

Televised proceedings

A ?crucial defect? in the police handling, according to Shoebridge, was the fact that the gunman was able to follow events on television.

He said the police should always consider putting a barrier or screen around the area, to shield the scene from cameras and keep the hostage-taker in the dark.

No element of surprise

Other than the televised news, it was clear to Mendoza what the police were doing at all times because the police moved ?laboriously slowly,? Shoebridge said.

The police did not distract Mendoza, so were unable to exploit the ?crucial element of surprise.?

Safeguarding the public

Shoebridge noted that at least one bystander was hit by Mendoza?s bullets.

?When you saw the camera view from above, it was clear there was little command and control of the public on the ground,? he said.

Use of brod to negotiate

Relatives and close friends can be a double-edged sword, Shoebridge said. While they may have leverage over the hostage-taker, what they say cannot be easily controlled.

In this case, Mendoza?s brother, Gregorio, was included in the negotiations, but at a certain stage he became agitated and police started to remove him from the scene.

Mendoza saw this on television, and became agitated himself.

Insufficient training

The police involved in the assault were clearly not trained in the necessary tactics to solve a hostage-taking.

After smashing the windows, one of the officers put some tear gas inside, though ?to what effect was not clear,? Shoebridge said.

He said a unit involved in this work needed to be ?trained again and again, repeatedly practicing precisely this kind of scenario.?

Outrage at gov?t

Michael Alan Hamlin, a Manila-based marketing consultant and author of ?High Visibility,? observed how outrage at the bloody outcome of the crisis shifted quickly from Mendoza to the government.

?People were looking to the government to act in a manner that demonstrated competence and professionalism, and that wasn?t apparent,? said Hamlin, who also noted the fundamental errors by police on crowd and media control, which may have helped turn events bloody.

Hamlin observed that the police waited more than an hour after the first shots before launching their assault on the bus.

?There were many times when they could have easily taken [Mendoza] out [before],? Hamlin said.

He also said basic communication at the scene before the shooting started was not focused on the task at hand, which was securing the hostages? safe release.

?Various spokesmen were talking about the potential impact [of the incident] on tourism, when obviously the message that needed to go out was, ?Our first focus and only concern right now is for the hostages,?? Hamlin said.

Sources: ?Ten things the Philippines bus siege police got wrong,? BBC News (http://www.
bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11069616) and ?Philippine leadership wilts under crisis spotlight,? CNN (http://edition.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/08/25.philippines.hostage.fallout/index.html)